Never have we seen such uniformly negative investor feedback Never in our many years in Staples have we seen such uniformly negative investor feedback on a transaction (GSK CH). We suspect the only reason that Unilever shares were not down much more yesterday is that they were already trading at a multi-decade low from a relative valuation perspective. The market is understandably concerned that there will be further moves Given that Unilever has already made three bids and has left the door open to a further move, the market is understandably nervous that there will be more to come, either with GSK CH or elsewhere (some speculating on Reckitt). Even leaving the finances to one side, we rather question whether Unilever can successfully acquire either asset. GSK CH and Reckitt would likely need shareholder approval, something that looks unlikely.... We believe that both GSK CH and Reckitt would likely be Class 1 transactions for Unilever. The implication of this is that both transactions would require a majority of voting shareholders to be in favour. Is this likely to be the case? We doubt it. Put simply, investors do not want Unilever spending capital on a material expansion until it has demonstrated that its own house is in good order. Which will start to make life rather difficult from a governance perspective Assuming that we are correct on Unilever shareholders likely voting intent, it means that they will not support the major strategic initiative that the Board/management are endeavouring to pursue. We find it hard to envisage that such a state of affairs can be sustainable. This year''s AGM could be rather eventful... While the market''s focus has always been upon activism being the catalyst for change, we are starting to ponder whether there may be other avenues. Mindful that under Unilever''s articles all directors stand for re-election every year, this year''s AGM has the potential to be eventful...